Apocalypse LAW: Soon the 1970s, Soon the 1950s
Demographics, Enrollments, AI Adaptation and FAR FEWER Lawyers
The combination of three mega trends will combine to take the number of lawyers in American from 4 for every 1000 Americans to only 1 for every 1000.
Enrollment in law school PEAKED in 2021 and has gone down every year since. This year 2025 law school enrollment matches the number in 2020 (the “Pandemic Matriculation”). One might expect it would continue to go up, yet no.
Declining United States population from two primary forces; low fertility + increasing rates of death by “Baby Boomers” (which will peak in 2037). Declining births and increasing deaths would make one think the lawyer to population will rise, yet also no, ultimately.
What explains a lower population not meaning we have more lawyers?
Is it all the lawyers who will die? Ha! Many may wish. No, it is because…
AI and Law as Technology adoption as a growingly better and less expensive alternative to hiring an attorney is expanding exponentially, close to logarithmically. And it gets better and better by the week. ChatGPT Gemini Llama Claude Grok 4 (yo!)….and now THOUSANDS of “wrappers” (programs built on top of LLMs) for Law specifically mean “everyone is getting it for free and do not need to ‘buy the cow.’”
Here is a chart for lawyer census over time in the USA
That first time since 1900 dip in lawyers was the Pandemic Year. And yet Law has not “recovered.” Instead the future outlook is grimmer, and grimmer still the further you go forward in time.
Here is the raw # of lawyers in America showing a “pinnacle year” (highest number) in 2019.
The “Baby Boomer death bubble” as I will call it of millions dying increasingly and peaking in 2037 means overall population loss.
I predict this will temporarily stabilize the lawyer to population ratio for a time, but it cannot sustain forever with AI adoption and every year decline in law school enrollment.
Here are some figures of law school enrollments by year:
Note the “pinnacle year” of 2021 and its all downhill after that. Population forces (the today lower birthrates impacting college enrollments and law school enrollments) mean fewer and fewer will become lawyers.
Finally, the “giant bite of AI” into the business of Law is a reality, not a speculation anymore. With advanced tools (a’hem like some of the ones we are building), more people will meet their Law needs with technology instead of a lawyer.
Here is how I predict the trendline will go:
But it may even go faster than this. Slower falling law enrollments and increased deaths will “hold” the ratio for a time and probably I am too generous above.
Yet within 25 years or less we will be at 1990s levels of lawyers to population, 40 years or less 1970s levels, and in 50-60 years or less we will be back in the 1950s — with 1-1.5 lawyers only per 1,000 people.
These are extrapolations on documented figures and trends. Yes I actually think will go much more quickly, actually.
But the “sense” will be a harder time to find a lawyer which will co-incidentally “push” people into using AI as an alternative. So a narrowing circle between two forces downward.
AND WAIT A MINUTE HOLD UP YES MY TIMELINE DOWN SHOULD BE MUCH MUCH MORE EARLIER-STEEPER !!!
CHECK OUT THE AGE DISTRIBUTION DEMOGRAPHICS FOR LAWYERS TODAY:
LOOKS LIKE CLOSE TO 40%-HALF OF LAWYERS ARE OVER 50! SO YES IN CONTRAST TO MY JOKE ABOVE ABOUT LAWYERS DYING — MANY OF THESE WILL IN FACT DIE —- CERTAINLY AROUND 20% NEAR TERM WHICH IS NO SMALL NUMBER.
QUESTION: What will it mean to have 1 out of 1000 lawyers instead of 4 out of 1000 (a 75% decrease in lawyers)?
I asked Grok and Grok answered :
Economic and Professional Impacts of Reducing Lawyer Density from 4 to 1 per 1,000 People
The scenario you're describing assumes a drastic reduction in the supply of lawyers—essentially a 75% drop in the lawyer-to-population ratio (based on current U.S. figures of approximately 1.3 million active lawyers for a population of around 340 million, yielding roughly 3.8 lawyers per 1,000 people).
This could hypothetically occur through factors like stricter bar exam standards, reduced law school enrollments, technological disruptions (e.g., AI handling routine legal tasks), or economic shifts discouraging new entrants.
Drawing from economic principles of supply and demand, as well as insights from legal profession analyses, fewer lawyers would generally make the profession more "valuable" in terms of earnings and status for those remaining.
However, it wouldn't be uniformly positive.
Economically, a lower supply of lawyers (assuming steady or growing demand for legal services) would shift the market equilibrium toward higher prices for services, benefiting incumbents.
Current discussions often highlight an oversupply in the U.S. legal market, leading to underemployment and depressed wages for new graduates.
Reversing this could alleviate those issues but introduce new challenges like workload strain.
Below is a balanced pros and cons analysis focused on how this change would affect lawyers themselves (e.g., earnings, job market, work conditions).
Earnings and Fees
Higher income due to reduced competition; clients would pay more for scarce expertise. Median starting salaries have dropped in oversupply conditions (e.g., from $72,000 in 2009 to $60,000 in 2012), so fewer lawyers could reverse this trend, potentially boosting earnings by 20-50% or more in high-demand areas.
Risk of fee caps or regulatory pushback if services become unaffordable, limiting premium pricing; in niche fields, overspecialization might lead to volatile income if demand fluctuates.
AI COUNSEL — PUSHING MORE AND MORE INTO AI SOLUTIONS IN LIGHT OF PREMIUM PRICING
Job Market and Security
Easier to secure jobs and clients; current oversupply means many graduates (e.g., 40% in 2011-2012) can't find full-time legal work, so a reduction could improve employment rates to near 100% for qualified lawyers.
Potential mismatches if lawyers cluster in lucrative urban/specialized areas (AIC - HELLO NEW YORK CHICAGO MIAMI LOS ANGELES DALLAS), leaving rural or low-pay fields underserved—forcing some to relocate or switch specialties unwillingly.
Workload and Balance
More selective caseloads, allowing focus on high-value work; less "commoditized" tasks (e.g., document review outsourced to AI) could elevate job satisfaction.
Heavier individual workloads if overall demand isn't met, leading to burnout—surveys already show high stress in the profession, and a shortage could exacerbate this with longer hours and fewer peers to share burdens.
Prestige and Professional Development
Elevated status as a "scarcer" profession, similar to medicine; could attract top talent and foster better mentorship in a less crowded field.
Reduced collaboration opportunities (e.g., fewer peers for networking or knowledge-sharing); innovation might stagnate if high barriers deter diverse entrants, limiting fresh ideas.
Overall Career Sustainability
Stronger long-term viability; lawyers could command better benefits and negotiate power with firms/clients, reducing underemployment risks.
Ethical and reputational pressures if public perceives lawyers as "gatekeeping" access to justice; potential for increased malpractice suits from overworked practitioners delivering rushed services.
AND AI COULD COME IN AND
EAT MOST OR ALL OF
WHAT REMAINS.
AND I THINK IT WILL. IF LAW CAN BE EFFECTIVELY DELIVERED BY CODE INSTEAD OF LAWYER, WE COULD ALSO VERY WELL SEE 1 LAWYER PER 2000 OR 1 LAWYER PER 4000 EVEN…………………………………………………………
AS I HAVE LONG SAID, LAW IS IN A MAJOR CHANGE-STATE WE ARE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BEGINNING OF A WHOLE NEW ERA.
